"Don White" wrote in message
...



Heard on the news yesterday that GM wasn't leasing vehicles anymore due to
poor sales after vehicles turned back in.
Is that the same south of the border?


Chrysler was the first to announce this. No more leases after this month.

GM and Ford were expected to do the same.

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"hk" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:


It has always been interesting to me that those who complain the most
about fat compensation packages are those not earning them.


You would expect an exec being paid multiple millions to bitch about it?


At that level, his/her compensation was most likely a negotiated package,
approved and authorized by the Board of Directors.

The Board of Directors work for the stockholders.

Fun to watch you get fired up so early.

Eisboch


Actually, the rules are set up by the SEC, where the BoD does not seem to
represent all the stockholders. Home Depot is a prime example.

HK wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Jul 30, 12:43 am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"JR North" wrote in message

...



The tow vehicle brake system must be able to stop the rig in a
reasonable distance in the event of trailer brake failure. An F150
brake system is NOT-REPEAT NOT adequate for this setup. Whether or not
it can pull the boat out of the hole (also doubtful) is irrelevant..
Get a real truck. F250 minimum., F350 better.
JR
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:22:27 -0500, SSmokin wrote:
I have a 2002 Ford F-150. 5.4, 4x4 Extended Cab. I'm looking at a
29' Cheetah offshore (CX-29). I know that the truck can pull the boat
from point A to point B, but what about "out of the water, on a steep
ramp"? Any thoughts?
HOME PAGE:
http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth
--------------------------------------------------
Here's the boat this guy wants to tow .....

http://www.cheetahboats.net/cheetah_...icture_211.jpg

If the question is serious .... I still say the F-150 is too light of
a duty
truck.

Eisboch

Yep.

They need a bigger truck!


You gotta be outa your mind these days to even consider buying one of
those "penis boats," let alone be thinking of trailering it.

I can remember when you said the same thing about guns.

If so, not nearly as bad as the 'Tow my Bayliner with my Yugo' thread of
yore.
JR


wrote:

On Jul 29, 10:28 pm, JR North wrote:

The tow vehicle brake system must be able to stop the rig in a
reasonable distance in the event of trailer brake failure. An F150
brake system is NOT-REPEAT NOT adequate for this setup. Whether or not
it can pull the boat out of the hole (also doubtful) is irrelevant..
Get a real truck. F250 minimum., F350 better.
JR

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:22:27 -0500, SSmokin wrote:

I have a 2002 Ford F-150. 5.4, 4x4 Extended Cab. I’m looking at a
29’ Cheetah offshore (CX-29). I know that the truck can pull the boat

from point A to point B, but what about "out of the water, on a steep

ramp"? Any thoughts?

HOME PAGE:http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth
--------------------------------------------------


This is a troll of some sort.. If you go over the posts from this guys
history, he says he owns just about everything on wheels, and
everything needs something fixed. There is something really fishy
about it though, Either way, the whole thread is most likely a sham...

--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth

JR North wrote:
If so, not nearly as bad as the 'Tow my Bayliner with my Yugo' thread of
yore.
JR


wrote:

On Jul 29, 10:28 pm, JR North wrote:

The tow vehicle brake system must be able to stop the rig in a
reasonable distance in the event of trailer brake failure. An F150
brake system is NOT-REPEAT NOT adequate for this setup. Whether or not
it can pull the boat out of the hole (also doubtful) is irrelevant..
Get a real truck. F250 minimum., F350 better.
JR

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:22:27 -0500, SSmokin wrote:

I have a 2002 Ford F-150. 5.4, 4x4 Extended Cab. I’m looking at a
29’ Cheetah offshore (CX-29). I know that the truck can pull the boat

from point A to point B, but what about "out of the water, on a steep

ramp"? Any thoughts?

HOME PAGE:http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth
--------------------------------------------------


This is a troll of some sort.. If you go over the posts from this guys
history, he says he owns just about everything on wheels, and
everything needs something fixed. There is something really fishy
about it though, Either way, the whole thread is most likely a sham...



Just about anything from JustWait is either a troll or off topic.
He reminds me of John McCain, a bitter little man with a nasty temper.


And what's wrong with towing a Bayliner with a Yugo?

Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...


What *I* stated was that the U.S. car makers were poorly managed, with
overpaid white collar mid and upper management. Many large U.S.
corporations grossly overcompensate "management." There have been plenty
of news stories about the tens of millions of dollars paid to top execs at
the same time the companies they run are failing.



Why were they poorly managed if, in the case of GM, they had record
corporate profits and paid regular, consistent dividends to the shareholders
for most of the past ten years? Plus met all the contractual obligations to
current and retired employees?

Take care of the business ..... the business will take care of you. It's
how it works, and there's nothing wrong with big paychecks for those with
the most responsibility.

Eisboch



He'll never get it. He fails to understand the difference between an
educated manager with true accountability and a guy on the line with a
GED. IF WAFA had it his way, no large corporation could survive.

Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...


What *I* stated was that the U.S. car makers were poorly managed, with
overpaid white collar mid and upper management. Many large U.S.
corporations grossly overcompensate "management." There have been plenty
of news stories about the tens of millions of dollars paid to top execs
at the same time the companies they run are failing.


Why were they poorly managed if, in the case of GM, they had record
corporate profits and paid regular, consistent dividends to the
shareholders for most of the past ten years? Plus met all the
contractual obligations to current and retired employees?

Take care of the business ..... the business will take care of you.
It's how it works, and there's nothing wrong with big paychecks for those
with the most responsibility.

Eisboch

Now *that* is funny. Take care of business and business will take care of
you. I'm sure that song plays well to the millions of American workers who
have lost their jobs because of crappy management, and the millions who
have also lost health care benefits, pension benefits, and much more,
despite giving all they had to "the business," and of course, let's not
forget the millions of American workers who have lost long-held jobs
because corporate management determined it would be "cheaper" to build or
service their product in China, India, or wherever.

Take care of the business for which you work, and, if it gets the chance,
the business for which you work will eliminate your job, your health care,
your pension. Or it will simply underfund its pension liabilities.

Sorry, but I don't believe that "shareholder equity" is any more valuable
than "worker equity." What many corporations in this country seem to do
best is to discard workers like used paper towels.

Note I said many...I did not say all.


Oh...and there is something wrong, very wrong, with the huge disparity at
many corporations between average pay and "executive" compensation.




"Take care of the business" implies doing a competent job whereby the
focus is on the success of the business. If the business is successful, so
will be the employees.

There's a huge change factor going on here .... the emergence of a global
economy. To remain competitive in it, the cost of doing business has to be
carefully analyzed and optimized. Otherwise, the business will ultimately
fail and everyone's out of a job and benefits.

It has always been interesting to me that those who complain the most about
fat compensation packages are those not earning them.

I never had one, BTW. My reward was the success of the business, and all
of those who participated in whatever capacity benefited proportionally.

Eisboch



He also forgets that business owners have *their* money on the line. If
a business fails, the employees won't share that loss - they will simply
move to another job.

These "entitlements" like free health care and pensions make me sick.
What's wrong with supplemented health care and a 401K plan with matching
funds? It works for me and my employees are doing fine.

wrote:
On Jul 31, 8:45 am, hk wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
The "future" of this country is in the hands of blithering uneducated
idiots like Loogy and his pals here, the ones with no imaginations, no
skills, no ability to think in the abstract. I'm glad I'm in my mid 60's
and unlikely to be around long enough to see them destroy with finality
what was once a great country.
Aw, come on. You love it and you know it.
Your life would be pretty dull with nothing to complain about.
Eisboch
Love idiots? I don't think so.

Things are pretty exciting around here at the moment. I'm writing and
will be co-producing and directing three new political television
commercials over the next 30 days, and we might be contracted for a few
more in September and early October. It's been a while since I've been
this directly involved in tv spots. These are just for U.S. House and
Senate candidates...nothing national, but a lot less dreary than the
position papers and daily speeches I usually get contracted to write.

Many years ago, I researched and wrote position papers for a fellow who
was running for federal office. This was in the days before the 'net
and easy access to some varieties of information, so the researching
took a lot of time and effort at actual libraries. The campaign had me
writing paper after paper, on the contingency that certain issues
*might* be raised, and they wanted to be prepared. What a frippin' drag
that was. Wish I had gotten paid by the word or by the pound for the
paper I used up.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Oh damn! The lies get deeper and deeper, as in bull****!
What ads are you co-producing so we can verify any of this?

He can't, but it's hilarious that he admits that the Democrats need
volumes of speeches to cover issues that are presented to them. What's
wrong with speaking your own mind or replying honestly to a question? I
guess they need Krause to spin their BS - at least he thinks that's the
case. Now *that's* sad!

Nothing at all. Just so many fewer Bayliners as a result.
JR


On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:00:28 -0400, hk wrote:

JR North wrote:
If so, not nearly as bad as the 'Tow my Bayliner with my Yugo' thread of
yore.
JR




And what's wrong with towing a Bayliner with a Yugo?